Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv: November 2005:
[Freeciv] Re: naval attacks on undefended cities

[Freeciv] Re: naval attacks on undefended cities

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv] Re: naval attacks on undefended cities
From: Sam Steingold <sds@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 11:17:02 -0500
Reply-to: sds@xxxxxxx

> * Jonadab the Unsightly One <wbanqno-IrLFYxOktEFfGaWA9+OTKt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
> [2005-11-08 10:36:12 -0500]:
> Per Inge Mathisen <per@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> That is why 1x1 islands are normally not generated, that is unless
>> you turn on the tinyisles option. However, someone insisted on
>> adding this as an option. In my opinion this was a bad idea.
> Such cites are *far* less likely to have any strategic importance
> than, say, a city on a one-tile-wide isthmus.

this is all totally beyond the point, which is -- a ship should be able
to shell an undefended city, reducing its population and/or destroying
I fail to see why a city with no units should be at an advantage
compared with a city with units.

Algorithmically, we can treat an undefended city of size N as if it were
a city of size N-1 defended by a single settler unit. I think this is a
reasonable approach.

Sam Steingold ( running w2k
Are you smart enough to use Lisp?

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]